Warranty costs can be the bane of hardware companies. Think about it. One of the great benefits of a software company (whether it’s the old fashioned standalone software on a disk or the more common webservices) is no warranty. Facebook does not have any set asides for warranty claims, which can run into the billions of dollars for some companies. Billions of dollars doing nothing but acting as insurance.

In my conversations with product engineers and designers, I often come across people who feel confident that their lithium-ion batteries are safe because they passed standards-based safety tests. If that is indeed the case, then why did major global companies experience thermal events even after having passed compliance tests? And that brings up a bigger question – are standards-based tests such as UL safety tests sufficient to guarantee lithium-ion battery safety?

When carrying out reliability testing calculations, there are two popular methods that are frequently chosen: Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) and Physics of Failure (PoF). While both approaches provide answers regarding a product’s predicted reliability, there are several key differences between the two that could have a significant impact on product development. A PoF approach offers several unique advantages over MTBF, but first, here’s a quick overview of how both methods evolved.

Avionics systems are complex and often interdependent, as demonstrated in an aircraft cockpit that houses control, monitoring, communication, navigation, weather and anti-collision systems. These highly regulated electronics are among the most expensive and standardized products available—considerable investments that are expected to perform for up to 30 years, making the determination of product lifetime reliability a top priority.